You misread the post. It says “as he filed his intent to run with (not for) the office of the Arizona Secretary of State.” The SOS is where candidates file campaign documents. He’s running for governor.

There’s no chance of Rick Romley, Grant Woods, Billy Shields or Phil Gordon supporting Thomas now after he went after their dear Mary Rose Wilcox and other assorted snakes. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who goes after Mary Rose has my eternal gratitude and support.

Two points, Brandy. Just because we dislike someone is not reason enough to abuse the immense power of elective office and concoct charges against them. Be careful where you place your gratitude. It could be you or yours next.

These wise words of Protestant Pastor Martin Niemoller, serve as a reminder. He spent the last seven years of Nazi rule in Hitler’s concentration camps.
“First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out–
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me–and there was no one left to speak for me.”

Also, Thomas knew exactly who and what these liberals were and what they stood for when he accepted their endorsement in 2004. Not a single one of them has ever changed their positions. He willingly took their support because he knew it would help him widen his voter base. AZ Conservative Guy said it straight out when he called him a “raw political opportunist.” I voted for him when he ran for county attorney. Never again.

That second photo is disgusting. I’ve never seen it before! It shows “conservative” Andrew Thomas to be nothing short of a raw political opportunist. Dare I say a politcal whore? He was obviously willing to set his anti-illegal immigration agenda aside to get the support of these dedicated foes of conservative Republicans.

Billy Shields is a powerful liberal Democrat union lobbyist whose daughter Mindy worked for and embezzled thousands of dollars from his friend (and now mayor) Greg Stanton’s campaign fund. Stanton was so beholden to Shields that he didn’t want to pursue criminal charges against her. In the end, Shields paid Stanton back and Mindy walked.

Phil Gordon is a Democrat wretch who backed Janet Napolitano. When he was mayor he imposed Sanctuary City status on the city of Phoenix, giving aid and comfort to illegal aliens. His police chief Jack Harris refused to arrest illegals in our city.

Grant Woods and Rick Romley are both Democrat-endorsing. pro-amnesty Republicans. So much for Thomas’s core beliefs. He’s actually a fan of expediency, his own.

All of these jerks despise Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who actually believes in enforcing the law.

We all know that these characters have misrepresented themselves to the people of this state or any other state.
Now we have court records which will establish the right of passage to those living in the house of Obama.
REALLY!!!!!!

Out of work Andrew Thomas has a very real incentive to run. Clean Elections candidates get $750,000 for the primary and a cool $ million for the general election. That easy money is generated by excessive surcharges on fines Arizona citizens pay on traffic tickets and jacked up court filing fees. The ballyhooed $5 donations (mostly paid by precinct committeemen hit up repeatedly by candidates at their district meetings) account for a pittance of the millions each candidate receives through this phony boondoggle.

If candidates have a message that resonates with voters, they will have donors. This sleazy device allows for Andrew Thomas types to run with plenty of money.

The question is, Matt, will there be a genuinely Conservative candidate, even in the primary, for Republicans to support. That is how things have been playing out lately. We end up ultimately having a “choice” between a Liberal Democrat and a RINO which, of course, is no “choice” at all!

“The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has given tacit approval to the Boy Scouts’ proposal to allow gay youth to join, saying they “appreciate the positive things” included in the plan to end the organization’s controversial ban on gay boys.”

“We are grateful to BSA for their careful consideration of these issues. We appreciate the positive things contained in this current proposal that will help build and strengthen the moral character and leadership skills of youth as we work together in the future,” the LDS church said Thursday in a statement posted to their website.”

That is a genuinely sad thing, Chandler GOP. I’m sorry that you have had to suffer that. You are not alone. I left the Protestant Christian denomination in which I was raised for the same reasons. Fortunately, God and Jesus Christ remain unaffected by the ever changing politics of mortal men. We can turn to Them directly when religious institutions lose their way.

Why you would be simply DELIGHTED if there were a DEMOCRAT governor, Westnash, Especially if it were your beloved Gabby Giffords or Mark Kelly! You are a big fan of their positions, especially on gun control!

“Westnash says:
January 8, 2013 at 8:00 am
There will be some changes in gun regulations at some point in 2013 and the Republicans who only tow the NRA line of “no” will lose. Wouldn’t you rather outsmart your opponent than trying unsuccessfully in throwing up a wall, that is crumbling down around you.”

And you support the restrictions which Giffords and Kelly want to put on gun magazines and gun show sales!

“Westnash says:
December 23, 2012 at 12:39 pm
Every hunting shotgun has a limit on shells…there is no place for large clips and no place for Gun Shows to sell on terms different than a retail gun shop.”

And, of course, like a good Liberal DEMOCRATS, you support expanded background checks!

“Westnash says:
April 1, 2013 at 1:32 pm
What is wrong with a better background check for guns? I have guns and have no problem with it. The Black Helicopter crowd may not like it but there is nothing unconstitutional about it.”

Why heck, you even refer to those opposing expanded background checks with the same belittling language as does Joe Biden, calling them “the black helicopter crowd”!

VICE PRESIDENT JOE BIDEN: “Now the NRA which is engaging in a campaign which is, I’m not unaccustomed to, of disinformation to try to scare people. Let me read some of the thing they’re saying about background checks. They say “We,” the Federal Government, “want to put every private firearms transaction right under the thumb of the Federal Government and keep all those names in a massive federal registry.” Kind of scary, man. The black helicopter crowd really is upset.”

“Westnash says:
March 1, 2013 at 9:06 am
Interesting that when you have someone like Joe who continues to hang on…you have a real vacuum behind them. Their ego just wont let them develop a successor. Joe should retire soon and develop a strong successor…but I am afraid hubris has set in long ago.”

Gee, you support the gun control of Gabby Giffords and Mark Kelly. You attack Sheriff Arpaio. How much more true Blue DEMOCRAT could you be?

In both of those photos Thomas’s supporters look like a ragged bunch, except the lefties in the second picture are better outfitted! The candidate himself appears enraged. Terrific. An angry oppressor who thinks he’s a victim.

That looks like Kathy McKee in the blue and white blouse. What in the world is she doing there? I wonder if she knew that former lawyer Thomas was actually the darling of the illegal immigration wing nuts who endorsed him in the top picture.
McKee led Protect Arizona Now and was the inspirational moving force behind the “Arizona Taxpayer and Citizen Protection Act,” on the ballot in 2004 as Prop. 200.
This popular measure was an AZ initiative passed by nearly 56% of Arizona citizens and required proof of citizenship to register to vote and voter identification at polling places. It also required state and local agencies to verify identity and eligibility, based on immigration status, of applicants for public benefits. The proposition’s provisions made it a misdemeanor for public officials to fail to report violations of US immigration law by applicants for public benefits.
The Feds later invalidated the very reasonable requirement to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote

So SRAZ announces Thomas’ candidacy in the same caustic, leftist style as the libtard local media and the reception here is that of minions of AZCentral. But then I suppose when you’re stuck on futile ‘whine’ 24/7, you don’t recognize good news when it slaps you in the face.

What the hell did posing with these endorsers have to do with his performance in office??? He fought illegal immigration as pledged in his campaign. He helped sway Napolitano to sign the Human Smuggling bill and then used it to convict smugglees as accessories – something that infuriated the dyke and the open-borders cabal. Perhaps you all would prefer Bill “AMNESTY” Montgomery as governor? Or Robert Graham?

“…If the unlikely possibility plays out and Thomas wins the primary, Republicans will lose the governor’s office. Count on it!…”

This is the exact mindset of Republican voters who installed McCain and Flake – party over principle. But it is much easier to blindly blame campaign funding, the Club For Growth, and senior citizens than to face reality. Party-over-principle is the mating call of a withering, dying sect. Add to that joining with the opposition who have targeted Pearce, Hayworth, Cardon, AND Thomas. Incredibly inept. Have a nice downward spiral.

You know, candidates TURN DOWN endorsements from and photo ops with those with whom they don’t want to be associated. Thomas has chosen to be associated with Phil Gordon, for example, which, if nothing else, shows poor judgment, if Thomas wants Conservative votes.

In addition, we have to ask ourselves why someone like Gordon would be willing to endorse Thomas and be in a photo op with him UNLESS Thomas plans on implementing measures of which Gordon approves.

Furthermore, political figures DO, all too often, change their positions nowadays to get elected. So past history no longer is an accurate predictor of future behavior. We need to look at where candidates are in the here and now, and standing next to Phil Gordon is not where I want a Republican candidate for governor to be standing!

Yep. The picture clearly shows that even back in 2004, “conservative” Thomas was ready willing and able to take endorsements from the very people he claimed to disdain. If you were a principled conservative candidate would you do that? And it wasn’t just Gordon. Grant Woods, Rick Romley and Billy Shields are hardly the types conservatives hang with. He was running for Maricopa County Attorney at the time and was willing to compromise what he said were his strong values for those endorsements. Leopards don’t change their spots.
Disappointing that you say you’ll reserve judgement. I have come to expect more from you, euby.

Given your past comments supporting Liberal Westnash, Orion, I doubt very much that you have come to expect more from me, LOL! But I have gotten from you exactly what I expected.

I see that you are in dire need of a haircut… and I’m just the one to give it to you!

Orion wrote: “Leopards don’t change their spots.”

Really, Orion? Is that right? Let’s see how your idea holds up to scrutiny, shall we?

Brewer was at odds with Planned Parenthood over monies going to an abortion provider. Now Brewer is backing Obama’s Medicaid expansion which will put money in the coffers of Planned Parenthood.

Rob Portman was considered to be a Conservative. He came out in support of homosexual “marriage”.

“Marco Rubio has changed his mind about the Arizona immigration law, which he now supports whole-heartedly, to the point of actually advocating the deportation of children to Latin American countries where he admits the culture would be alien to them.” But now Rubio is backing the “Gang of 8” illegal alien amnesty plan.

So Leopards do, in fact, change their spots, Orion, and in what way they may change them remains to be seen! That’s a good reason to reserve judgment!

So the next time you address me, Mr. Wetnash supporter, don’t come out half stepping with folksy “wisdom” that doesn’t hold water. That is unless you feel that you are in need of another haircut!

Oh yeah, Orion, and in case you’re thinking of making the argument that all Leopards who change their spots change them in the direction of being more Liberal, put this in your pipe and smoke it:

“Artur Davis, Former Democratic Congressman, Will Switch Parties”

“05/30/2012”

“Former Rep. Artur Davis is not sure if he will run for Congress again. But if he does, he will do so as a Republican.”

“Davis, who represented Alabama’s 7th congressional district for four terms as a member of the Democratic party, wrote on his website on Tuesday that he has not yet made up his mind on whether or not to run in the future. However, he has decided to change his party affiliation.”

“If I were to leave the sidelines, it would be as a member of the Republican Party that is fighting the drift in this country in a way that comes closest to my way of thinking: wearing a Democratic label no longer matches what I know about my country and its possibilities,” Davis wrote in a blog post.”

eubykdisop,
Do you collect and catalog comments from others in an effort to intimidate or out of boredom? Your constant retorts with multiple “quotes” are worse than tiresome, they’re bizarre. Calm down and watch as other adults interact normally. We don’t all agree, but we do dialogue and have the right to our opinions without having to endure haranguing insults.

You wrote, “Leopards don’t change their spots”, meaning that politicians don’t change. I presented facts to refute your home spun, folksy “wisdom”. In response, you now want to talk about me instead of about what you wrote! Changing the subject when you find yourself holding an unsupportable position is… well… BIZARRE!

Among the few things that Westnash and I agree on is the need for you to start your own blog and stop dominating this one with your cut and pastes and insults. That fact that you post in the middle of the night is also telling.

Where’s your list of those who ran and were elected as conservatives who willingly accept the endorsements of far left, committed open borders liberals? You probably call them “progressives,” the name they prefer. Get a clue. Thomas has been outed as an unprincipled opportunist.

No, Orion, what is telling is how you made a statement which you can’t defend and so seek to change the subject!

You wrote, “Leopards don’t change their spots”, meaning that politicians don’t change. When your home spun, folksy “wisdom” was soundly refuted, you suddenly wanted to change the subject and talk about me instead of your demonstrably false and unsound statement.

What I hear you saying is that you want yet more proof that what your wrote is false. I’m more than happy to accommodate you, Orion!

“Elected as Democrat, state senator to join Republicans”

“By YANCEY ROY, November 13, 2012”

“An incoming Brooklyn state senator, elected as a Democrat, said Tuesday that he’ll join the Republican conference.”

“I have enormous respect for senators from both parties, but I must choose to caucus with those senators who will best serve the communities I represent,” Felder said in a statement.”

Ronald Reagan was indeed a Democrat. He was even a union leader. But he never abused the power vested in him as Thomas has done. He is an conservative icon today because after he left the motion picture industry, he became a defender of morality and constitutional principles. No one ever accused him of being corrupt. His optimism and well known good humor uplifted our nation. His fiscal principles set us on a course of prosperity. He had never been politically motivated but after speaking in support of Barry Goldwater’s presidential candidacy, he was recruited by a newly formed group known as “Friends of Reagan” to run for governor of California. He ultimately defeated the incumbent liberal Democrat Pat Brown. (Brown’s son Jerry “Moonbeam” is now in the process of destroying the state of Mexifornia.).

Thomas has cost the county millions of dollars in lawsuits over his bogus cases and even was in process of suing for mega-millions himself, before he thought better of it. Thomas filed a notice of claim against the taxpayers of the state of Arizona seeking $23.5 million for “personal and professional damages.” He also filed a $23.5 million claim against Maricopa County taxpayers.. When he realized those outrageous claims didn’t play to his base, he dropped both legal claims.

First, you chose to post up here, instead of where I commented on Reagan below, for the express purpose of avoiding addressing what I confronted you with. So let’s begin by reposting what I wrote below up here and then maybe you’ll actually address the issues I raised AND answer the questions I posed to you!

I’m usually in agreement with you, Villanova, but I have to take issue with a few of the statements in your above comment.

You wrote: “I disagree that the photo op he willingly engaged in should be “thrown in the dust bin.” It speaks to the core of the man.”

How does this fit into that paradigm, Villanova? You can hear Ronald Reagan, as a Democrat, attacking Republicans and campaigning for Hubert Humphrey as U. S. Senator:

“Ronald Reagan LIBERAL DEMOCRAT.”

Is it the case that Reagan’s above recorded comments “spoke to the core of the man”? Should we have assumed, as does poster “Orion”, that a leopard doesn’t change it’s spots? Do you consider that Ronald Reagan remained a Liberal Democrat?

Now, Villanova, would you care to actually address the issues I raised and the questions I asked or are you going to try to run away again?

In 2004, AZ GOP was still floundering in the stranglehold of the CoC $$crats, and Woods and Romley were their darlings. Andrew Thomas did what any Republican candidate had to do – he sought the endorsements of the Party.

I suggest that we stop whining about old, time-worn campaign photo ops and look instead at the actual record of Andrew Thomas. He kept his promises and fought for AZ. He enforced the laws to protect AZ and he prosecuted the corrupt politicians who broke the law. His courage and loyalty to AZ quickly caused the RINOS to turn on him and try to get their shivs in his back.

Andrew Thomas continued his fight for AZ despite the daunting and continuous opposition from leftist forces at home and around the country. The fight continued out of office, when Thomas and his co-crusaders were persecuted by a rogue Bar Association in an illegal process being pushed by disgraced politicians and judges and by his RINO detractors.

I further suggest that a nine-year-old campaign photo should be thrown in the dustbin. Our attention now should focus on the records of candidates, and on the actions within the state GOP HQ.

Facts are stubborn things, Leo. The facts are that the conservative candidate Thomas was willing to stand with and take the endorsements of the most notoriously liberal Democrats and RINOs in order to win. Principles went out the window. The back story to this gathering would be intriguing.

I disagree that the photo op he willingly engaged in should be “thrown in the dust bin.” It speaks to the core of the man. Shall we also toss the pictures of other people and incidents that make us uncomfortable? History repeats itself. Remembering is wise. George Santayana reminded us, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Andrew Thomas did some good things; he also abused the vast power of his office, for which he was rightly disbarred. The hearings were open and available to the public on a daily basis. They are still archived online. This post even links to them. They were the most watched programming at the time, with tens of thousands tuning in each day. Now Thomas is claiming to be a victim of the profession to which he belonged. He was the rogue, not the system. the state bar or the judges. To call him a “crusader” is laughable. The tragedy is that a lot of the naïve believe much of what he has to say. He was neither courageous nor loyal and was not persecuted but prosecuted.

As a primary candidate he will receive three quarters of a million dollars in public funding. That has its own appeal, especially to one whose employment prospects in his chosen field are slim.

I’m usually in agreement with you, Villanova, but I have to take issue with a few of the statements in your above comment.

You wrote: “I disagree that the photo op he willingly engaged in should be “thrown in the dust bin.” It speaks to the core of the man.”

How does this fit into that paradigm, Villanova? You can hear Ronald Reagan, as a Democrat, attacking Republicans and campaigning for Hubert Humphrey as U. S. Senator:

“Ronald Reagan LIBERAL DEMOCRAT.”

Is it the case that Reagan’s above recorded comments “spoke to the core of the man”? Should we have assumed, as does poster “Orion”, that a leopard doesn’t change it’s spots? Do you consider that Ronald Reagan remained a Liberal Democrat?

Wrong, Leo. I am not Mary Rose. Last time I looked I stood at the loo.
I’m a Republican and have no tolerance for Mary Rose or any of her cohorts. That does not mean I endorse bringing meritless charges against them. They and the judges he also tried to destroy have won their lawsuits because they had standing to do so. Not one of Thomas’ cases saw the light of day. In the end, his attempts to gain political advantage by prosecuting those he believed to be his political enemies, brought him down. It’s called paranoia. Dictators of third world countries routinely engage in this tactic. Let’s all pray we have the right to expect more here in the USA.

The question is, Vince, should one brave the terrors of Mary Rose flatulence, secondary to her consumption of refried beans? A close inspection of her gluteus maximus could prove hazardous to one’s health!

The County Attorney’s Office today filed a brief with the Arizona Supreme Court asking the court to terminate or, at minimum, refer to an independent special master all State Bar inquiries regarding the County Attorney and other prosecutors in related matters due to serious ethical misconduct by Bar officials and attorneys.

The petition for special action was filed after evidence has mounted that former members of the Maricopa County judiciary improperly enlisted the State Bar, which is an arm of the judiciary, to begin retaliatory investigations of Thomas and other prosecutors due to their criticism of several county judges last year. This sudden flood of investigations occurred right after Thomas criticized members of the county judiciary over their handling of Proposition 100, the ballot measure approved by 78 percent of Arizonans that ended the right to bail for illegal immigrants accused of serious felonies. Growing evidence has made clear the Bar investigations, which legal experts have unanimously concluded are frivolous, were intended to retaliate for the Proposition 100 controversy, as well as to intimidate prosecutors into not criticizing county judges.

Thomas stated, “Proposition 100 is the law of the land today because I took on the judges who refused to enforce it. Now, some judges have reportedly retaliated by encouraging the State Bar to launch improper investigations of my prosecutors and me. Our office will not be intimidated. And I will continue to speak out and defend the will of the people.”

Accompanying the brief were affidavits from five esteemed experts in legal ethics stating Thomas had acted properly in all areas being scrutinized by the Bar and had committed no violations of the rules of professional responsibility. These experts are: Thomas Zlaket, former Chief Justice of the Arizona Supreme Court; Jack La Sota, former Attorney General of Arizona; Ernest Calderon, former State Bar President; Geoffrey Hazard, former Yale Law School professor and perhaps the nation’s leading expert on legal ethics; and Michael Alan Schwartz, former chief counsel at the State Bar of Michigan.

The following misconduct by Bar officials and attorneys was identified in affidavits and exhibits submitted to the Supreme Court today:

After Superior Court judges urged the Bar to “do something” against Thomas, State Bar President Daniel McAuliffe launched a public relations campaign against the County Attorney intended to prejudice all attorneys and judges against him and his office. This included sending an article to every attorney and judge in Arizona in which McAuliffe claimed falsely that Thomas had accused every Maricopa County Superior Court judge of bias. There is strong evidence McAuliffe and other outside parties are involved in the investigations, as he and a public defender leaked news of these matters to the media weeks before Thomas received notice of them from the State Bar.

Chief Bar Counsel Robert Van Wyck, a Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Pro Tem, has admitted prejudice against the County Attorney’s Office because of the County Attorney’s handling of “illegal alien” criminal cases. He said he recused himself from all criminal cases filed by the County Attorney’s Office because he saw a “conflict” due to his disagreement with the office’s handling of cases against “illegal aliens” and the office’s “plea policies.” Yet he has refused to recuse himself from the Bar investigations.

In letters to former special prosecutor Dennis Wilenchik and a second, currently employed county prosecutor, Van Wyck misrepresented the ethical rules in an attempt to compel them to reveal privileged information. Van Wyck has taken the position that attorneys may not assert the attorney-client privilege or any other privilege in Bar investigations. This position is plainly contrary to law and the Supreme Court’s own rules. As a result of his efforts, Van Wyck succeeded in violating the attorney-client privilege in the Wilenchik matter.

When attorneys for Thomas complained to Van Wyck about these and other actions by the Bar, Van Wyck retaliated. He sent them another frivolous inquiry against Thomas that was three months old. This matter was dismissed recently, but only after taxpayers were forced to spend thousands of additional dollars to respond to it.

Van Wyck has pledged to give the privileged information he is seeking to adverse parties in current or prior litigation against the County Attorney’s Office or Maricopa County. Van Wyck is openly coordinating his investigations with attorneys for the New Times in its recent lawsuit against Maricopa County officials. As a result, the State Bar is seeking to compel the production of privileged information from Maricopa County attorneys to hand over to a plaintiff in active litigation against the county. He is doing this even though legal experts have unanimously agreed Thomas did not violate the rules of professional responsibility in his handling of the New Times matter.

The antics of President Obama’s Department of Justice are legion, from its insistence on employing only far-left attorneys, its threat to prosecute the CIA, its scandalous “Fast and Furious” gun delivery system to Mexican drug cartels, its battle to overrule residents of a city who wanted to dispense with party affiliations on ballots, its refusal to prosecute the nightstick-wielding New Black Panther Party members to its lawsuit against Arizona for trying to enforce federal immigration law..

It is in this atmosphere that a case has developed in Arizona that is blasting a former prosecutor and two associates for their attempts to follow the book and apply the law to actions by the system’s power brokers and others.

It is so egregious that even the former prosecutor’s harshest critics are saying that the overreaching “gives credence to [Andrew] Thomas’ claim that he is the victim of a witch hunt.”

Now the bar association has responded with an apparently politically charged 82-page complaint that so outraged the Maricopa County Republican Association that its members passed a resolution to denounce it.

That resolution reads in part:

“WHEREAS, former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio have been leaders in the fight to crack down on illegal immigration, taking on activist judges who tried to thwart Proposition 100 (no bail for illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes), and investigating corruption at the county level;

“WHEREAS, in a politically motivated move due to its opposition to Arpaio’s and Thomas’s policies, the State Bar of Arizona, which is under the control of liberal attorneys and criminal defense attorneys, is attempting to take the license to practice law from Andrew Thomas, one of his former prosecutors Lisa Aubuchon, and discipline a third former prosecutor, Rachel Alexander;

“WHEREAS, even a columnist for the liberal Arizona Republic, Robert Robb, has denounced the bar’s investigation, writing about the bar’s investigation, ‘Many of the alleged ethical violations are grounded in the claim that Thomas acted in bad faith for political retaliation. I doubt the evidence will clearly establish that.’

“WHEREAS, the state bar of Arizona has a history of refusing to take action against those who agree with their political philosophy;

“NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Maricopa County Republican Executive Guidance Committee that it demand the state bar drop the baseless and politically motivated investigation into Andrew Thomas, Lisa Aubuchon and Rachel Alexander.”

A resolution from the “Maricopa County Republican Association” is proof of what? How many there actually understood the gravity of the situation? Instead they invited Thomas as a guest and gave him a standing ovation! Hardly an unbiased, albeit uniformed, group.

How’s that Kool Aid taste, eubykdisop? Hundreds of folks in Jonestown swallowed it, too. Unfortunately, theirs was grape flavored and laced with cyanide. It’s clear you have not watched any of the hearings or you would not be so ill informed and eager to accept distortions….and then pass them on as fact.

Gee, ACG, apparently, being comprehension challenged, you could only take in part of the article. Here, try reading the whole thing this time:

Even harshest critics call bar association case ‘gross overcharging’

10/28/2011

The antics of President Obama’s Department of Justice are legion, from its insistence on employing only far-left attorneys, its threat to prosecute the CIA, its scandalous “Fast and Furious” gun delivery system to Mexican drug cartels, its battle to overrule residents of a city who wanted to dispense with party affiliations on ballots, its refusal to prosecute the nightstick-wielding New Black Panther Party members to its lawsuit against Arizona for trying to enforce federal immigration law..

It is in this atmosphere that a case has developed in Arizona that is blasting a former prosecutor and two associates for their attempts to follow the book and apply the law to actions by the system’s power brokers and others.

It is so egregious that even the former prosecutor’s harshest critics are saying that the overreaching “gives credence to [Andrew] Thomas’ claim that he is the victim of a witch hunt.”

Now the bar association has responded with an apparently politically charged 82-page complaint that so outraged the Maricopa County Republican Association that its members passed a resolution to denounce it.

That resolution reads in part:

“WHEREAS, former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and Sheriff Joe Arpaio have been leaders in the fight to crack down on illegal immigration, taking on activist judges who tried to thwart Proposition 100 (no bail for illegal immigrants who commit serious crimes), and investigating corruption at the county level;

“WHEREAS, in a politically motivated move due to its opposition to Arpaio’s and Thomas’s policies, the State Bar of Arizona, which is under the control of liberal attorneys and criminal defense attorneys, is attempting to take the license to practice law from Andrew Thomas, one of his former prosecutors Lisa Aubuchon, and discipline a third former prosecutor, Rachel Alexander;

“WHEREAS, even a columnist for the liberal Arizona Republic, Robert Robb, has denounced the bar’s investigation, writing about the bar’s investigation, ‘Many of the alleged ethical violations are grounded in the claim that Thomas acted in bad faith for political retaliation. I doubt the evidence will clearly establish that.’

“WHEREAS, the state bar of Arizona has a history of refusing to take action against those who agree with their political philosophy;

“NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Maricopa County Republican Executive Guidance Committee that it demand the state bar drop the baseless and politically motivated investigation into Andrew Thomas, Lisa Aubuchon and Rachel Alexander.”

“Among the issues that originally attracted attention was the $347 million in taxpayer funds used for a court tower during an economic downturn, a building that featured plush quarters for judges and raised eyebrows as it was done at a time when county employees were being laid off.”

“WND has learned that as many as 11 county employees have been terminated in recent months for allegedly accepting bribes in a court tower construction scandal – one of the Thomas investigations that was stymied.”

When we think of political persecution, places such as Tiananmen Square may come to mind. Increasingly, however, this tool of tyranny is coming to our shores — and it is not made in China. It is, in the case I’ll discuss today, made in Maricopa County.

Not surprisingly, as in the film Walking Tall, Arpaio’s and Thomas’s attempt to end local corruption has come at a price: the State Bar of Arizona (SBA) has begun prosecuting Thomas and two of his deputies in a move that reeks of political retaliation.

The problems for Thomas and his deputies started when the County Supervisors filed wrongful prosecution charges against them with the SBA, which the County Supervisors’ leftist allies in the bar association ran with. What were these local politicians so upset about? John Hawkins at RightWingNews.com provides some background, writing:

Thomas came up with a unique way to prosecute illegal immigrants with a felony, instead of just letting them go with a slap on the wrist. He used a felony smuggling statute to prosecute them, describing them as “smuggling themselves.” With a felony conviction, they would be required to serve time and would not be able to return to the U.S. He even distributed money – which was seized from racketeering funds – to programs for youth run by the Boy Scouts and churches. By law, that money is to be distributed to organizations that keep youth away from crime and drugs. Thomas ensured that it was no longer only distributed to left wing politically correct organizations. Due to the proactive efforts of Thomas, along with Joe Arpaio and Senator Russell Pearce, illegal immigration has greatly decreased in Arizona. The population of illegal immigrants dropped by one-third over two years.

“The Arizona Bar Association is trying to stop a county prosecutor from enforcing an illegal immigration law overwhelmingly approved by voters with an intrusive “ethical misconduct” investigation of the entire office.”

“The group that claims to enhance the legal profession by promoting competency and ethics began investigating Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas and several of his prosecutors after they challenged judges who ignored a state law that denies bail to illegal immigrants charged with felonies. The measure, Proposition 100, was approved by nearly 80% of Arizona voters in 2006.”

“Many judges refused to abide by the new measure, however, often granting bail to serious criminals living in the country illegally. Thomas, who was elected Maricopa County Attorney in 2004, took on the judges and won. He successfully got the Arizona Legislature and state Supreme Court to force them to comply with Proposition 100.”

“Their monstrous egos deflated, the judges retaliated by encouraging the State Bar to launch improper investigations to intimidate prosecutors. In six different probes, the Arizona Bar has requested privileged material involving parties that have current or prior litigation against the county attorney’s office. Some of the information has been turned over to an alternative tabloid that opposes Thomas.”

“Numerous highly regarded legal experts, including a former Arizona Bar president and state Supreme Court justice, have determined that the investigations have no merit.”